If they're going to take my freedoms away and not listen to reason, then I officially refuse to be patriotic about anything.
Oh my gawd - tell me you are joking. You need to get some fuckin' perspective you ungrateful sack of shit.
These rulings suck - I'll give you that. But if you think that they are anywhere near justifying a statement like that than you are so utterly sheltered it's almost pitiable. Almost.
There are entire countries where people are praying that they'll eat tomorrow. Whole cultures oppressed by their governments. People who can't remember a time that bombs weren't exploding in the distance. I could never name a hundredth of the grave injustices that other governments inflict upon their people.
But I have to listen to people like you whine, "Waaaah - I want to decrypt PDFs. I hate America!" Ugghh.
I'll tell you what - why don't you go stay in Afghanistan for a month. Then report back on whether you'd still like to trade your life in the U.S. for a few poorly-crafted laws.
Oh, and let me assure you, this is not a fucking troll. You have genuinely pissed me off.
Commercial success and the GPL can and do mix well. Obviously, it does require being careful about the integration, but oftentimes the results are worth it.
Case in point: TiVo (At its heart lies the Linux kernel.)
Why don't you just re-license it to specific companies that you want to see use it?
Although it would be nice, this is probably not going to be as easy as you suggest.
The problem is that FLAC is an open source project hosted on SourceForge. As such, it is probably very likely that the project owner has accepted code from various contributors. This means that unless these contributors have explicitly granted him the copyright ownership of their code, he is in no position to re-license it.
At this point, he has two options:
1 - Replace all contributed code with his own; and do so without infringing on the anyone's copyright.
2 - Get everyone who contributed to grant him copyright ownership. Which, depending on how many people contributed, can be quite difficult.
I've always liked this idea for making money from Free software. You basically charge only those people who have no intention of giving back to the community. Unfortunately, unless you have planned ahead, it can be pretty difficult to pull off.
The term "fair use" simply means that you cannot be prosecuted for letting your friend read your book, or copying your CDs to different media and so on. It does not mean that the publishing companies have to make it easy (or even possible) for you to do so.
Basically, "fair use" means you won't get in trouble for a little sharing, but it doesn't mean it'll be easy.
Simply listen on a good turntable: use your ears, and you will prefer vinyl. I have never met anyone who disagreed after actually listening.
Guess what - vinyl is not more accurate than a CD. The fact that you and your cronies prefer to listen to records just means that you enjoy the audial artifacts that the arise from the vinyl process. You like the pops and the hiss and the warmth. It does not mean that the audio is more "pure".
The Robot Exclusion Standard (e.g. robots.txt) is mainly useful for making sure that search engines don't cache dynamic data on your web site. That way users don't get a 404 error when clicking on your links in the search results.
You should not be using robots.txt to keep confidential data out of caches. In fact, most semi-intelligent crackers would actually download the robots.txt with the specific intention of finding ill-hidden sensitive data.
What is so unfortunate about something not being harmful to MS?
Apparrently you have not actually done business with Microsoft. Or somehow, the fact that Microsoft is an overbearing, oppressive monopoly has evaded you. And what of the Justice Department's ongoing scuffle with them - do you think it's just because Windows crashes? I could go on for days about all the reasons to hate Microsoft - literally.
As we speak, tens of thousands of IT managers are having to purchase the lastest versions Office XP otherwise they won't be getting the upgrade price if they do it later.
And why do you think that NONE of the big 5 PC vendors sell systems that dual-boot between Windows and Linux? I'll give you a hint: It ain't because Linux is too expensive. Microsoft actually forces vendors to agree not to ship dual-booting systems or - gues what - they can't sell Windows!
Microsoft is a stank, festering chancre on the computer industry's face and anything unfortunate that happens to them is a good thing for the computer industry.
So, yes, I do yearn for Microsoft's failure; but it's not so Linux can succeed, it's so anybody can.
What I don't understand is if everyone (Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft) sells these consoles as "loss leaders" then how can anyone make money selling clones? After all, isn't Nintendo going to be the only one making money on developer licenses for the GameCube?
It amazes me that anyone would connect a home computer to the network without a firewall.
You've been brainwashed. Firewalls are absolutely unnecessary for networks with properly configured machines and semi-intelligent users. This is not unlike anti-virus software.
I get so tired of hearing "Oh gawd, I would NEVER bypass my firewall. That's crazy!" What, pray tell, is vulnerable about a Windows machine on an unfirewalled network (provided that it's properly configured and unneeded services are disabled)?
Firewalls are an extra level of protection - not a necessary one.
Hmmm - an AMD eh? Would you by chance be using a VIA chipset?
I'll have to admit that I don't keep up on the LKML like I should, but I've been afraid to use DMA on 2.4 because of the file system corruption it was experiencing with VIA chipsets early on. [I have a PIII with a VIA Apollo Pro 133A chipset.] Wasn't that the reason that Linus decided to default to "DMA disabled".
Did that ever get resolved or should I still be wary of DMA?
I'm sorry that these corporations have these rigths in the USA, but why not work to change that instead of trying to change the big companies themselves?
Good point. I'm afraid what you've witnessed is a small fraction of the hopelessness that pervades the American psyche with regard to our current political machine.
It's like a terminal disease. After watching so many good candidates passed over for the puppets with big money backing them, you begin to stop trying to fix the system and instead focus on treating the symptoms. *Siggghhhh*
You mean I'm not allowed to purchase tickets to a movie by WB or Disney but not like the fact that they take my rights away with the profits?
Correct. It's too bad you're being sarcastic.
Do you vote for politicians whose policies clash with your own? Wouldn't that be kind of silly? When you give Disney $20 bucks for a DVD or movie ticket, you have sent them the message that you approve of their business policies.
I thought thats what laws were for... regulate what they could and could not do with the money they make off making good movies.
Ummm, are you new in this country? Who do you think pays for those laws? I'll give you a hint: If you haven't written a $20,000 check to someone's campaign in the last year, then it ain't you. As long as there are deep-pocket lobbyists in Washington, I wouldn't count on any laws protecting your interests.
Not to insult the/. crowd too much, but the costs associated with storing this much data long term would be absolutely stratospheric.
I find it hard to believe that any company would say, "Hey Herbert, we need $10 million per year of storage. Why don't you go check Slashdot and see what they think?"
This would be the kind of project that most consultants have wet dreams about.
Have you ever read 1984? Restricting language is _very_ evil.
Are you joking?
There's a big difference between censoring what people can say and not suggesting offensive words to morons who aren't creative.
Re:NOT Debian unstable!
on
Debian On DVD
·
· Score: 2
I acknowledge that IDE is somewhat slower than SCSI. My point is that for most situations (particularly workstations) the cost premium for SCSI just isn't worth it.
If IDE and SCSI were the same cost, then the previous poster would have a legitimate reason for saying "IDE sucks so bad".
Re:NOT Debian unstable!
on
Debian On DVD
·
· Score: 2
...since IDE sucks so bad.
Okay - I'll bite.
Yes, IDE drives are a little slower than SCSI drives. Yes, IDE is a storage-only protocol.
But to say "IDE sucks so bad" is basically like saying Honda Accords suck because they can't do 180 mph like a Dodge Viper.
With a lot of things, you get what you pay for. But with SCSI hard drives in a workstation environment, that's just not true. You pay substantially more for a marginal speed improvement. By buying a faster processor with the money you save on IDE, you can more than compensate for the CPU cycles it wastes.
Thanks for the entertainment - it's been a while since I've been trolled like that.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh my gawd - tell me you are joking. You need to get some fuckin' perspective you ungrateful sack of shit.
These rulings suck - I'll give you that. But if you think that they are anywhere near justifying a statement like that than you are so utterly sheltered it's almost pitiable. Almost.
There are entire countries where people are praying that they'll eat tomorrow. Whole cultures oppressed by their governments. People who can't remember a time that bombs weren't exploding in the distance. I could never name a hundredth of the grave injustices that other governments inflict upon their people.
But I have to listen to people like you whine, "Waaaah - I want to decrypt PDFs. I hate America!" Ugghh.
I'll tell you what - why don't you go stay in Afghanistan for a month. Then report back on whether you'd still like to trade your life in the U.S. for a few poorly-crafted laws.
Oh, and let me assure you, this is not a fucking troll. You have genuinely pissed me off.
Case in point: TiVo (At its heart lies the Linux kernel.)
Your development platform of choice is a Sega Dreamcast? Interesting choice.
Although it would be nice, this is probably not going to be as easy as you suggest.
The problem is that FLAC is an open source project hosted on SourceForge. As such, it is probably very likely that the project owner has accepted code from various contributors. This means that unless these contributors have explicitly granted him the copyright ownership of their code, he is in no position to re-license it.
At this point, he has two options:
1 - Replace all contributed code with his own; and do so without infringing on the anyone's copyright.
2 - Get everyone who contributed to grant him copyright ownership. Which, depending on how many people contributed, can be quite difficult.
I've always liked this idea for making money from Free software. You basically charge only those people who have no intention of giving back to the community. Unfortunately, unless you have planned ahead, it can be pretty difficult to pull off.
Good luck, buddy.
Geez - I guess that's one way to keep people from using NAT behind their cable modem.
Basically, "fair use" means you won't get in trouble for a little sharing, but it doesn't mean it'll be easy.
Guess what - vinyl is not more accurate than a CD. The fact that you and your cronies prefer to listen to records just means that you enjoy the audial artifacts that the arise from the vinyl process. You like the pops and the hiss and the warmth. It does not mean that the audio is more "pure".
You should not be using robots.txt to keep confidential data out of caches. In fact, most semi-intelligent crackers would actually download the robots.txt with the specific intention of finding ill-hidden sensitive data.
What the hell is a "one person admin team"? ;-)
If anyone went through the trouble of reading this article, let me know what it says.
Apparrently you have not actually done business with Microsoft. Or somehow, the fact that Microsoft is an overbearing, oppressive monopoly has evaded you. And what of the Justice Department's ongoing scuffle with them - do you think it's just because Windows crashes? I could go on for days about all the reasons to hate Microsoft - literally.
As we speak, tens of thousands of IT managers are having to purchase the lastest versions Office XP otherwise they won't be getting the upgrade price if they do it later.
And why do you think that NONE of the big 5 PC vendors sell systems that dual-boot between Windows and Linux? I'll give you a hint: It ain't because Linux is too expensive. Microsoft actually forces vendors to agree not to ship dual-booting systems or - gues what - they can't sell Windows!
Microsoft is a stank, festering chancre on the computer industry's face and anything unfortunate that happens to them is a good thing for the computer industry.
So, yes, I do yearn for Microsoft's failure; but it's not so Linux can succeed, it's so anybody can.
Although many people think of Linux as a replacement for Windows, the truth is that Amazon used Linux instead of other Unixes.
Oh well, it's still good news.
What I don't understand is if everyone (Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft) sells these consoles as "loss leaders" then how can anyone make money selling clones? After all, isn't Nintendo going to be the only one making money on developer licenses for the GameCube?
It doesn't - and the saddest part is that the MPAA and its ilk are convincing Congress that you are criminal for doing this.
You've been brainwashed. Firewalls are absolutely unnecessary for networks with properly configured machines and semi-intelligent users. This is not unlike anti-virus software.
I get so tired of hearing "Oh gawd, I would NEVER bypass my firewall. That's crazy!" What, pray tell, is vulnerable about a Windows machine on an unfirewalled network (provided that it's properly configured and unneeded services are disabled)?
Firewalls are an extra level of protection - not a necessary one.
I don't know what's weirder - that Road Runner supported a OpenBSD question or that an OpenBSD user actually called their tech support. ;-)
I'll have to admit that I don't keep up on the LKML like I should, but I've been afraid to use DMA on 2.4 because of the file system corruption it was experiencing with VIA chipsets early on. [I have a PIII with a VIA Apollo Pro 133A chipset.] Wasn't that the reason that Linus decided to default to "DMA disabled".
Did that ever get resolved or should I still be wary of DMA?
Good point. I'm afraid what you've witnessed is a small fraction of the hopelessness that pervades the American psyche with regard to our current political machine.
It's like a terminal disease. After watching so many good candidates passed over for the puppets with big money backing them, you begin to stop trying to fix the system and instead focus on treating the symptoms. *Siggghhhh*
Correct. It's too bad you're being sarcastic.
Do you vote for politicians whose policies clash with your own? Wouldn't that be kind of silly? When you give Disney $20 bucks for a DVD or movie ticket, you have sent them the message that you approve of their business policies.
I thought thats what laws were for ... regulate what they could and could not do with the money they make off making good movies.
Ummm, are you new in this country? Who do you think pays for those laws? I'll give you a hint: If you haven't written a $20,000 check to someone's campaign in the last year, then it ain't you. As long as there are deep-pocket lobbyists in Washington, I wouldn't count on any laws protecting your interests.
Fortunately, I've made enough pro-Linux posts that I've got Karma running out my ass.
I find it hard to believe that any company would say, "Hey Herbert, we need $10 million per year of storage. Why don't you go check Slashdot and see what they think?"
This would be the kind of project that most consultants have wet dreams about.
When someone tells you: "You're not allowed to say that." That IS censorship.
When you ask someone for a synonym for 'dickhead' and they say: "I'm not telling you." That IS NOT censorship.
Seriously, by what logic do you derive the notion that not providing synonyms for offensive words is censorship?
Are you joking?
There's a big difference between censoring what people can say and not suggesting offensive words to morons who aren't creative.
If IDE and SCSI were the same cost, then the previous poster would have a legitimate reason for saying "IDE sucks so bad".
Okay - I'll bite.
Yes, IDE drives are a little slower than SCSI drives. Yes, IDE is a storage-only protocol.
But to say "IDE sucks so bad" is basically like saying Honda Accords suck because they can't do 180 mph like a Dodge Viper.
With a lot of things, you get what you pay for. But with SCSI hard drives in a workstation environment, that's just not true. You pay substantially more for a marginal speed improvement. By buying a faster processor with the money you save on IDE, you can more than compensate for the CPU cycles it wastes.
Thanks for the entertainment - it's been a while since I've been trolled like that.